Disposed

B.Narasimha Murthy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC22 Feb 2017WP/5904/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired employees of Eluru District Cooperative Central Bank filed this Writ Petition seeking pay fixation benefits similar to those granted by G.O.Ms.No.224 in 2010, which were applied only from a later date. The Court disposed of the petition directing the respondent to consider their representation expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Directed the First Respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 12.05.2016 and pass appropriate orders within two months.

B.Narasimha Murthy Vs The State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.5904 OF 2017

¶3

Dated:22.02.2017

¶4

Between :

¶5

B. Narasimha Murthy, S/o. Venkanna, Aged about 62 years, Occ: Retd. Spl. Category Assistant, R/o. Eeletipadu Village, Iragavaram Mandal, West Godavari District and others .. Petitioners And

¶6

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Cooperation Department, Velagapudi, Guntur District and others .. Respondents

¶7

This Court made the following :

¶8

¶9

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.5904 OF 2017

¶10

ORDER :

¶11

Heard. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

¶12

Petitioners are employees of Eluru District Cooperative Central Bank. They retired from service between 01.03.2009 and 01.04.2013. The Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.224 in the year 2010 granting pay fixation benefits to the posts held by the employees similar to the petitioners. However, the said benefits were extended only from 01.04.2013. Ventilating their grievance, the petitioners submitted several representations since 12.05.2016. Copies of their representations and representations made on their behalf by association were filed as enclosures to the Writ Petition. Since the claim is yet to be considered by the competent authority, this Court is not inclined to entertain and keep the Writ Petition pending.

¶13

On the claim made by the petitioners, the competent authority has to take a decision whether to accede to their claim or not.

¶14

In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to consider the representation dated 12.05.2016 submitted by the petitioners along with similarly situated persons, and pass appropriate orders with reference to cut off date in G.O.Ms.No.224 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶15

¶16

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition

¶17

shall stand closed.

¶18

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

¶19

Date:22.02.2017

¶20

B.Narasimha Murthy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Narasimha Murthy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V. Venkata Reddy (Blind) Vs Regional Manager,Mahabubnagar Region

Andhra Pradesh Mid-day Meals Workers Union, Chittoor Vs The Goverment of Andhra Pradesh,rep.by its Principal

Boddu Suresh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K. Rama Swamy, Vs The Divisional Manager

P. Satya Rao, S/o. Late P. Satyam, Vs The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary

Srirama Linga Rao, Vs The State of Telangana